Neb. health officials late drafting meth rules
8:00 AM
Posted: Friday, October 03, 2008
LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) -- Nebraska health officials are more than a year late making rules to protect the public from the toxic chemicals in home-based methamphetamine labs.
More than two years ago, state lawmakers said there was a pressing need for stringent cleanup rules to protect children and others. So they passed a law that required the state Department of Health and Human Services to craft the rules by July of last year.
The rules were supposed to dictate how residential properties that housed meth labs would be cleaned up so future residents would be safe.
More than 14 months after the July 15, 2007, deadline, there are still no rules in place. That leaves local health officials without clear guidance on how they are supposed to handle the toxic aftermath of home-based meth labs.
Some local health department officials -- who are required by the 2006 law to ensure state-approved rules are followed during meth cleanups -- say they haven't had reports of home-based meth labs in their regions.
"We watched the deadline come and go," said Jeremy Eschliman, environmental health specialist at the Central District Health Department, which covers Hall, Hamilton and Merrick counties. "We've been fortunate we haven't had one."
Mary Sue Semerena, administrator of the environmental health division of HHS, said the 2007 deadline was missed because of varying standards for the cleanup of the large number of chemicals used to make meth.
"There isn't an easy way to decide what those standards should be," Semerena said.
Property owners are still required by the law to clean up following the discovery of meth labs and are voluntarily using methods outlined in proposed rules and regulations even though they haven't been approved yet, Semerena said.
A hearing on the proposals is set for Oct. 9.
"We've had quite a few people contact us and say, 'What do I do?"' with a home where meth has been made, Semerena said. They are told to follow the yet-unapproved rules, she said.
The rules were up for approval this spring but taken off the docket in early September after real estate agents raised concerns. State health officials had wanted to require sellers of residential properties to notify buyers and renters that meth had been made in the properties where they would be living.
Lawmakers considered such a requirement two years ago but backed away.
When state officials put a similar requirement in its slate of proposed rules this spring, real estate agents argued that the 2006 law didn't give them the authority to require that a seller disclose a property's past. The agents also argued that sellers already have to disclose to buyers whether properties have had toxins.
State officials responded by removing the notification requirement.
"Our intent is to make sure we can sell property," said Korby Gilbertson, lobbyist for the Nebraska Realtors Association. "You don't need to put a scarlet 'M' on the property if it's been deemed to be cleaned up."
Gilbertson said the lack of rules has created some confusion in the real estate industry. While the 2006 law requires property owners to clean up meth-infested residences, "there's no way you can go to a property owner and say, 'Here's what you have to do,' because there's no rules and regulations," Gilbertson said.
The lack of rules doesn't appear to have caused widespread problems yet. That may be largely due to a dwindling number of meth labs in the state.
Before the Legislature passed a law in 2005 that put cold and flu medicines containing the key meth ingredient pseudoephedrine behind store counters, there were routinely about 300 meth labs annually found in the state. That number includes instances where officials found equipment to make meth scattered along a roadside, not just full-blown labs.
So far this year, about 31 labs or their remnants have been found, according to the State Patrol.
More than two years ago, state lawmakers said there was a pressing need for stringent cleanup rules to protect children and others. So they passed a law that required the state Department of Health and Human Services to craft the rules by July of last year.
The rules were supposed to dictate how residential properties that housed meth labs would be cleaned up so future residents would be safe.
More than 14 months after the July 15, 2007, deadline, there are still no rules in place. That leaves local health officials without clear guidance on how they are supposed to handle the toxic aftermath of home-based meth labs.
Some local health department officials -- who are required by the 2006 law to ensure state-approved rules are followed during meth cleanups -- say they haven't had reports of home-based meth labs in their regions.
"We watched the deadline come and go," said Jeremy Eschliman, environmental health specialist at the Central District Health Department, which covers Hall, Hamilton and Merrick counties. "We've been fortunate we haven't had one."
Mary Sue Semerena, administrator of the environmental health division of HHS, said the 2007 deadline was missed because of varying standards for the cleanup of the large number of chemicals used to make meth.
"There isn't an easy way to decide what those standards should be," Semerena said.
Property owners are still required by the law to clean up following the discovery of meth labs and are voluntarily using methods outlined in proposed rules and regulations even though they haven't been approved yet, Semerena said.
A hearing on the proposals is set for Oct. 9.
"We've had quite a few people contact us and say, 'What do I do?"' with a home where meth has been made, Semerena said. They are told to follow the yet-unapproved rules, she said.
The rules were up for approval this spring but taken off the docket in early September after real estate agents raised concerns. State health officials had wanted to require sellers of residential properties to notify buyers and renters that meth had been made in the properties where they would be living.
Lawmakers considered such a requirement two years ago but backed away.
When state officials put a similar requirement in its slate of proposed rules this spring, real estate agents argued that the 2006 law didn't give them the authority to require that a seller disclose a property's past. The agents also argued that sellers already have to disclose to buyers whether properties have had toxins.
State officials responded by removing the notification requirement.
"Our intent is to make sure we can sell property," said Korby Gilbertson, lobbyist for the Nebraska Realtors Association. "You don't need to put a scarlet 'M' on the property if it's been deemed to be cleaned up."
Gilbertson said the lack of rules has created some confusion in the real estate industry. While the 2006 law requires property owners to clean up meth-infested residences, "there's no way you can go to a property owner and say, 'Here's what you have to do,' because there's no rules and regulations," Gilbertson said.
The lack of rules doesn't appear to have caused widespread problems yet. That may be largely due to a dwindling number of meth labs in the state.
Before the Legislature passed a law in 2005 that put cold and flu medicines containing the key meth ingredient pseudoephedrine behind store counters, there were routinely about 300 meth labs annually found in the state. That number includes instances where officials found equipment to make meth scattered along a roadside, not just full-blown labs.
So far this year, about 31 labs or their remnants have been found, according to the State Patrol.
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 0 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
